An introduction to international arbitration:

a guide from Stephenson Harwood LLP

 Contents
1. Introduction 1

2. Quick reference guide 2

3. Arbitration or litigation? 5

4. Drafting an arbitration agreement 8

5. Investment treaty arbitration 9

6. An overview of the major 10

arbitration centres

7. Specialist centres 17

8. Why Stephenson Harwood LLP 20

”The firm has scored

many wins when it
comes to arbitration-
related litigation […] it is
considered a ‘go-to’ firm.”
Global Arbitration Review 2017

b
Before litigation starts
1. Introduction
Although arbitration is often referred to as
part of the new wave of ‘alternative’ dispute
resolution techniques, such as mediation,
it is one of the oldest forms of dispute
resolution. Arbitration was practised in
ancient Greece and Rome. The first English
Arbitration Act was passed in 1698.
International arbitration has grown in
importance in the last few decades, in
tandem with globalisation. This is for several
reasons. Most importantly, arbitration works.
According to a recent survey of major global
corporations, arbitration is the most favoured
dispute resolution mechanism for international
matters (ahead of court litigation, mediation,
adjudication and expert determination),
whether as claimants or respondents.
As this guide demonstrates, there are several
forms of arbitration, many adapted to the
circumstances of particular types of dispute.
Yet, whatever form it takes, arbitration always
offers the opportunity for parties to bypass
the traditional court route and, in the right
circumstances, it offers many advantages.
Arbitration is particularly well-suited to
international cases because it applies a single
set of rules to multi-jurisdictional disputes,
but still relies on the powers held by national
courts to enforce awards.
Arbitration is most well-established in the
insurance, construction, energy and shipping
industries and is taking root in other areas too,
notably in financial services. In 2013, for the first
time, the International Swaps and Derivatives
Association (ISDA) published a guide to
arbitration for its members. Nevertheless, there
remains a degree of misunderstanding and
confusion about arbitration.
Perhaps the least understood difference
between arbitration and other forms of
dispute resolution is that the decision to use
arbitration is overwhelmingly made when
contracts are entered into – long before
the dispute arises. To reap the benefits
of arbitration, the right decisions must
therefore be made at an early stage.
This guide will explain how arbitration works,
how it should be used and its benefits and
drawbacks.
1
Before litigation starts
2. Quick reference guide
What is arbitration?
Arbitration is an alternative to litigation. It
is primarily used to resolve disputes arising
from commercial contracts, especially
contracts with an international element.
Arbitration is also the designated default
dispute resolution process in disputes
between governments and companies under
international trade or investment treaties.
By agreement between the parties (usually
contained in a clause of the contract in
dispute), an independent arbitrator, or a
panel of three arbitrators (the tribunal), is
appointed to hear the dispute and to produce
a ruling (the award) on the merits.
The tribunal may award damages or other
relief against the losing party. Awards can be
enforced in the 156 signatory countries to
the New York Convention on the Recognition
and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
Awards 1958 (see http://www.uncitral.org/
uncitral/en/ uncitral_texts/arbitration/
NYConvention_ status.html).
2
How does arbitration differ
from other methods of dispute
resolution?
Arbitration shares some of the traits of litigation
and mediation but has features which are
distinct from both. Similar to litigation, the
award made by the tribunal in an arbitration is
binding on the parties. However, unlike going
to court, the process is usually less formal and
is confidential. Although mediation is informal,
it requires both parties to reach an agreed
settlement rather than having a decision
imposed on them; this means that, subject to an
award being challenged in court, there is greater
finality to the arbitration process.
How do I commence arbitration
proceedings?
How and where to arbitrate is determined by
the parties’ arbitration agreement, usually
contained in the contract in dispute. The
agreement sets out how many arbitrators
are to be appointed, how they are to be
appointed, where the arbitration will be held,
in what language it will be conducted and
under which institutional rules (if any). It is
also possible for both sides to agree to go
to arbitration after the dispute has arisen,
but this is much less common because the
agreement of both parties is necessary. This
is often not possible when a commercial
relationship has already broken down.
Who runs arbitrations?
There are a number of well-established
organisations that administer international
arbitrations and each has its own set of rules.
Some well-known institutions include the
International Chamber of Commerce (ICC),
the London Court of International Arbitration
(LCIA) and the Singapore International
Arbitration Centre (SIAC).
There is also a range of organisations
specific to particular industries (shipping
or commodities, for example) which
administer arbitrations. Other administering
bodies include the dispute resolution
mechanisms attached to international
trade and investment treaties such as the
International Centre for the Settlement of
Investment Disputes (ICSID). Although these
organisations have fixed geographical bases
(the ICC, for example, is based in Paris), many
of these bodies will run arbitrations in any
country chosen by the parties.
It is far from compulsory, however, for
arbitrations to be administered by one of
these organisations. Ad hoc arbitrations can
be established by agreement between the
parties and these arbitrations are often run
using the United Nations Commission on
International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) rules.
Arbitrations are also subject to the laws
of the country which is the ‘seat’ of the
arbitration, regardless of the governing law
of the contract in dispute. Although many
countries have implemented the UNCITRAL
Model Law (which provides an arbitration-
friendly legislative framework) into their
national law, there can be significant
differences between jurisdictions.

“It’s a sharp team with a panache for

making a solid and comprehensive analysis
of issues, and for providing succinct and
practical advice in complex matters. Their
research skills are simply outstanding.”
Chambers UK 2018
3
What are the advantages of
arbitration?
• It is confidential (unless the parties agree
otherwise).
• It can be quicker and cheaper than
litigation, especially for smaller and mid-
sized cases.
• The procedure is flexible and can be
altered to suit the specific circumstances
of each case.
• For technically complex disputes, parties
can select arbitrators with the relevant
experience or background to hear the
dispute, rather than having to rely on
a judge (or jury) who will likely have no
relevant technical experience.
• In most countries, enforcing awards
is usually more straightforward than
enforcing court judgments thanks to
the New York Convention, to which 156
countries are currently signatories.
• It avoids national courts which may be
perceived as corrupt and/or inefficient.
• For international disputes, it can prevent
different countries’ laws coming into
conflict by settling on one governing
law and one set of rules at the outset.
The arbitration can also be held in a
pre-determined neutral venue, reducing
the possibility of ‘forum shopping’
delaying the proceedings and removing
accusations of deliberate or cultural bias
in the outcome.
4
What are the disadvantages of
arbitration?
• Unlike judges, arbitrators’ fees must be
paid by the parties. This can be expensive
compared to conventional court fees in
many jurisdictions.
• Arbitration can be more expensive and
time consuming than court proceedings
for larger, more complex disputes.
• Arbitration can be more time consuming
because of problems with the availability
of arbitrators, especially if they are
based abroad. In court proceedings, any
available judge can hear a case.
• Avenues for appealing and/or challenging
awards are limited if you lose.
• Arbitrators sometimes lack the power to
make certain interim orders against the
parties before publishing the final award.
• Unlike mediation, arbitration is an
adversarial process. It is less likely that a
commercial relationship will survive after
the process has ended.
• In disputes involving more than two
parties, arbitration can be difficult to
manage, particularly where some aspects
of the dispute are subject to arbitration
and others to litigation.
Before litigation starts
3. Arbitration or litigation?
It is a fundamental principle of almost all
countries’ arbitration law that there must be
an agreement between the parties to refer a
dispute to arbitration. If this is not the case,
then arbitration will not be available as a
means of dispute resolution.
Otherwise, the main factors to consider
include:
• Cost and time
• Selection of arbitrators
• Procedure
• Confidentiality
• Neutrality
• Appeals process
• Enforcement
Cost and time
Arbitration is sometimes said to be quicker and
cheaper than litigation. This may be true, but
is normally only the case in respect of small
to medium-sized disputes. For larger, more
complex disputes, arbitration can be more
expensive and time-consuming than litigation.
There are several reasons for this.
First, a judge in court proceedings is not
paid by the parties. Arbitrators’ fees are
borne by the parties. This can be expensive,
particularly where there are three arbitrators.
Their fees are usually paid (in part at least) in
advance, may be proportionate to the value
of the dispute and may be non-refundable in
the event of settlement.
Second, arbitration may take longer than
litigation because there is no system to
regiment the availability of arbitrators.
Especially with a three-person tribunal, it
can be difficult to book hearing times which
all the arbitrators can attend. In addition, a
lenient tribunal may permit the parties more
extensions of time to meet deadlines than
would be permitted by the courts.
Finally, in arbitration, the parties have to find
and pay for a hearing venue, whereas the use
of a court is free.
A factor which may affect the parties’
decision to arbitrate is the level of court
fees in the relevant jurisdiction. In many
jurisdictions, court fees are modest, but in
others, court fees can be significant.
Selection of arbitrators
The fact that the parties can select their
arbitrators, or at least choose an appropriate
arbitration centre which will select the
arbitrator(s), often makes arbitration a more
attractive option than litigation, where
judges are selected without reference to
the parties’ wishes. The obvious advantage
of selecting your own arbitrator is that you
can either choose someone with expertise
relevant to the subject matter of the dispute
5
or, if the matter turns on a point of law, you
can select a lawyer or a judge. Once selected,
the tribunal will be in charge of the case for its
duration. With litigation, a number of judges
may deal with a case during its lifetime.
Finally, contrary to common belief, it is not
true that an arbitrator will be sympathetic to
the party who appointed him or her.
Procedure
The arbitration process is more flexible than
court proceedings. The parties can choose
a procedure which is suitable to the dispute;
this takes precedence over the views of the
tribunal. Therefore a dispute could be resolved
solely by reference to documents or written
submissions, without the need for a hearing.
Confidentiality
One of the most attractive aspects of
arbitration is that all the proceedings are held
in private and are confidential. Hearings in
court proceedings are generally heard in public.
The principle attraction of arbitration is that
oral evidence given by a party’s employees,
directors or senior executives will not be
heard by the public, and competitors and
others will not know about the dispute.
6
Neutrality
Where parties come from different countries
they can choose a neutral forum for the
resolution of their dispute. For example,
contracting parties from two different
countries could choose England as the place
of arbitration: a neutral forum that would avoid
either party having to submit to the jurisdiction
of the other party’s national courts.
Appeals process
In many jurisdictions, the ability to appeal
awards to the court is limited. This preserves
the principle that the parties are free to
agree how their disputes are resolved
with minimum court intervention. From a
commercial point of view, it means that the
rendering of an award by the arbitrators will
normally mark the end of proceedings. In
order to avoid any uncertainty, parties can
exclude the right of appeal in their arbitration
agreement. Under a number of institutional
arbitration rules, there is no right of appeal.
This provides greater finality than litigation in
many jurisdictions.
Enforcement
The enforcement of judgments or awards
is an important factor to take into account
when choosing an appropriate means for
the resolution of disputes. Due to a number
of conventions (the most well-known being
the New York Convention), arbitration
awards are recognised and can be enforced
in 156 countries. It provides, in theory, for
a relatively simple and effective method of
obtaining recognition and enforcement of
awards across the globe. In reality, even in
some countries which are parties to the New
York Convention, enforcement can still be
relatively difficult. However, the enforcement
of awards is generally still far easier than the
enforcement of court judgments.
The Decision
There are clearly a number of important
considerations to be taken into account
when deciding whether to resolve disputes
by arbitration or litigation. Often commercial
agreements between parties include a
provision that disputes will be referred to
arbitration in a stated country. It is important,
therefore, to weigh up the advantages
of arbitration before agreeing to such a
provision. It is also important to carefully
choose the jurisdiction for settling disputes,
whether arbitration or litigation is chosen.
Some contracting parties prefer to choose
a country with which the parties are most
closely connected or where the performance
of the contract is most likely to take place.
Others choose to select a country that is
totally unconnected with the parties, to
introduce an element of neutrality. It must
be remembered that, whichever country
is chosen, the arbitration process itself will
be subject to the laws of the country of the
arbitration’s ‘seat’—even if the governing law
of the contract in dispute is different.
7
Before litigation starts
4. Drafting an arbitration agreement
The first step in any arbitration is the drafting
of an appropriate arbitration agreement. This
usually begins when the underlying contract
is negotiated. Careful thought needs to
be given to the form of the arbitration
agreement. Unfortunately, in many cases
the parties’ corporate counsel incorporate
boilerplate arbitration agreements which
do not take into account the particular
circumstances of the contract.
It is important to carefully consider what is
included in the arbitration agreement because
getting it wrong can be extremely costly.
Some of the main factors to consider are
listed below. Some will be more relevant to
individual circumstances than others and
there may be additional factors that are
relevant to the particular circumstances of
each contract.
It is always advisable to seek legal advice
when drafting arbitration agreements.
Considerations:
• Is arbitration the most suitable form of
dispute resolution, bearing in mind the
nature of the contract?
• Do the parties want to refer all disputes
arising out of the contract to arbitration
or only certain types of dispute?
8
• Where do the parties want the ‘seat’ of
the arbitration to be? This is important
because the seat of the arbitration
will also mean that the laws of that
jurisdiction will apply to the arbitration’s
procedure. Some jurisdictions do not
have laws (or courts) which adequately
support effective arbitration.
• Do the parties want the arbitration to be ad
hoc or conducted under institutional rules?
• How many arbitrators do the parties
want to appoint (one or three)? Three will
increase the cost and usually mean that
diaries are harder to co-ordinate.
• Who will appoint the arbitrators — the
parties or an independent body? What
happens if the parties cannot agree?
There must be a fall-back position.
• In what language do the parties want the
arbitration proceedings to be conducted?
• How many parties are likely to be
involved? If there are more than two, then
a multi-party arbitration clause may be
necessary.
• In multi-party scenarios, consideration
must be given to whether the tribunal
should be provided with a specific power
to consolidate connected arbitrations and/
or join additional parties to the arbitration.
Before litigation starts
5. Investment treaty arbitration
One type of international arbitration which has
seen a significant increase in popularity in the
last decade is investment treaty arbitration.
Most investment treaty arbitrations are
conducted under the auspices of the
International Centre for Settlement of
Investment Disputes (ICSID). ICSID was
created by the 1965 Washington Convention,
which has been ratified by 161 states. It is a
division of the World Bank, which administers
arbitrations under its own rules. ICSID was
created to promote international trade
and investment, by providing a neutral
and specialised forum for the settlement
of disputes between a host state and an
investor from another state, which has arisen
out of an investment made in the host state.
ICSID arbitration has a number of
distinguishing features. First, unlike other
international arbitrations, arbitrations
conducted under its rules are delocalised;
the arbitration has no seat. Second, ICSID
awards are directly enforceable in signatory
states as if they were judgments of the
courts of the state of enforcement. Third,
enforcement of ICSID arbitration awards is
governed by the Washington Convention,
not the New York Convention.
As with other types of arbitration, there
must be an agreement to arbitrate. This
may be a specific contractual agreement
to resolve disputes by ICSID arbitration.
However, more commonly, the agreement
is contained elsewhere, as the investor
is generally not suing its contractual
counterparty but the state in which the
investment was made. The arbitration
agreement is therefore usually found in the
host state’s national investment legislation,
a multilateral investment treaty or a bilateral
investment treaty (BIT).
BITs provide a framework agreement
between two states for the protection and
fair treatment of investments made by
nationals of either state in the territory of the
other state. There are currently more than
2,800 BITs in force globally.
Investment treaty arbitration may provide
an aggrieved party with an additional or
alternative means of recovering its losses.
Investment treaty arbitration is therefore a
useful and significant type of arbitration in an
increasingly globalised world.
9
Before litigation starts
6. An overview of the major
arbitration centres

Choosing the right arbitration venue is important. In this section, we provide a brief overview
of the major centres.

London:
London Court of International
Arbitration (LCIA)

Paris:
International Chamber of
Commerce (ICC)

America: Switzerland:
American Arbitration Swiss Chambers'
Association (AAA)/ Arbitration Institution
International Centre for (SCAI)
Dispute Resolution (ICDR)

Nigeria:
Lagos Court of
Arbitration

10
Stockholm:
Stockholm Chamber of
Commerce (SCC)

China:
China International Economic and
Trade Arbitration Commission
(CIETAC)

Rwanda:
Kigali International
Arbitration Centre
(KIAC)
Hong Kong:
Hong Kong International
Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)

Mauritius: Singapore:
LCIA – MIAC Singapore International
Arbitration Centre (SIAC)

11
American Arbitration
Association (AAA)
www.adr.org
Established in 1926, the AAA is a well-
recognised provider of administered
arbitration proceedings. In 1991, it formally
adopted a set of rules to govern its
increasing load of international cases. The
AAA International Arbitration Rules, which
are based on the UNCITRAL rules, were
revised in 2008. Long a leader in domestic
arbitration services in the United States, the
AAA is becoming increasingly prominent in
international arbitration.
The AAA also has expedited procedures that
apply when no claim or counterclaim exceeds
a specified amount. Parties can agree to
use these procedures even if their claims
and counterclaims are of greater value. The
Stockholm Chamber of Commerce is the only
other major arbitration institution with a set
of rules specifically designed for expedited
proceedings. Other institutions are considering
whether to introduce such rules.
12
China International Economic
and Trade Arbitration
Commission (CIETAC)
www.cietac.org.cn
Arbitration in mainland China is dominated
by CIETAC which was established (as the
Foreign Trade Arbitration Commission of the
International Trade Promotion Commission)
in April 1956. CIETAC is an independent
non-governmental arbitration institution. It
maintains a panel of over 1,000 arbitrators from
more than 30 countries who possess extensive
professional knowledge in various industries.
Originally it only had jurisdiction to
deal with disputes involving a foreign
party. Subsequently, its jurisdiction
has expanded to both domestic and
international arbitrations. CIETAC is now
the most important arbitration institution
in China. It has administered more than
10,000 international disputes since its
establishment. On average, around 1,000
new disputes are filed each year.
Hong Kong International
Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)
www.hkiac.org
The premier arbitration body in Hong Kong
is HKIAC. It was established in Hong Kong in
1985 to provide a broad range of arbitration
services. It is an independent and non-profit
making company.
HKIAC has administered over 4,000
international and domestic disputes, primarily
in the areas of construction, commercial
disputes, joint ventures and shipping. HKIAC
also manages the Hong Kong office of the Asian
Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre, which
is the only domain name provider in Asia and
provides dispute resolution service for generic
top-level domain names (for example, .com,
.org and .net). HKIAC has also been appointed
as the domain name dispute resolution service
provider for .hk, .cn, .pw and .ph domain names.
HKIAC maintains a panel of highly experienced
arbitrators. There are approximately 300
international and local arbitrators on the
panel, consisting of judges, senior counsel
and leading individuals from international
commerce. As the only statutory appointing
authority for arbitrators in Hong Kong, HKIAC
is empowered to determine the number of
arbitrators and/or to appoint arbitrators if the
parties cannot agree.
International Chamber of
Commerce (ICC)
www.iccwbo.org
The ICC and its International Court of
Arbitration is one of the most prominent and
well regarded institutions for international
arbitration. Since its inception in 1923,
the ICC has administered over 10,000
arbitrations involving parties and arbitrators
from over 170 countries and territories.
The Court of Arbitration does not determine
disputes. However, it plays an important role in
administering arbitrations under the ICC rules.
Two procedural aspects of ICC arbitrations
are noteworthy. First, within two months
(or such additional time as the tribunal may
allow) after the tribunal receives the file, the
tribunal prepares ‘terms of reference’ and
submits them to the Court of Arbitration
for approval. The terms of reference are
intended to define the claims and defences
of the parties at an early stage, to crystallise
the issues for determination by the tribunal
and to address procedural issues. Once the
terms of reference have been approved by
the Court of Arbitration, new claims can only
be made with the permission of the tribunal.
Second, before an award is published by the
tribunal, the Court of Arbitration reviews
the draft award for its form. The Court of
Arbitration may also make suggestions
concerning the substance of the draft award.
This review process is intended to promote
the publication of consistently high quality
awards by ICC tribunals.
13
Kigali International Arbitration
Centre (KIAC)
www.kiac.org.rw
KIAC was established in 2013. It aims to take
advantage of Rwanda’s increasingly business
friendly reputation to establish itself as the
leading arbitral institution for the resolution
of African disputes.
Lagos Court of Arbitration (LCA)
www.lagosarbitration.org
Founded in November 2012, the LCA aims
to become West Africa’s premier arbitral
institution, offering a credible local alternative
to the LCIA and ICC, which currently administer
the majority of arbitrations relating to Africa’s
largest economy.
14
London Court of International
Arbitration (LCIA)
www.lcia-arbitration.com
The LCIA is one of the oldest major
international arbitration centres. Although
based in London, it is an international
institution and a large proportion of the
members of the LCIA Court are not from
the United Kingdom. In 2011, the LCIA and
Mauritius government jointly established a
new arbitration centre in Mauritius, LCIA-
MIAC, with its own set of rules.
The LCIA offers international arbitration
anywhere in the world. However, if the
parties have not stipulated a venue in their
arbitration agreement (and unless the
LCIA determines there is some reason why
another venue should be chosen), London
will be the seat of the arbitration.
The LCIA deals with a variety of commercial
disputes, including those relating to energy,
foreign trade, transport, distribution,
technology, construction and engineering.
In order to provide and to maintain its
services and to meet the needs of the
international business community, the LCIA
has formed Users’ Councils which cover the
major trading areas of the world. Each Users’
Council has its own officers and devises its
own programme of activities appropriate to
the needs of the region.
The LCIA’s latest rules came into effect in
October 2014. Notable changes include
provisions on the conduct of parties and legal
representatives, as well as greater scope for
emergency relief (including the appointment
of emergency arbitrators).
Singapore International
Arbitration Centre (SIAC)
www.siac.org.sg
Many significant commercial arbitrations in
Singapore take place under the auspices of
SIAC. Created in 1991, SIAC is recognised
as one of the leading arbitration institutions
in Asia. Having been initially funded by the
Singapore government, SIAC is now entirely
self sufficient and is affiliated with the
Singapore Business Federation, the apex
organisation of the business community
in Singapore. Since its inception, SIAC has
administered over 1,000 disputes involving
parties from the Americas, Europe, Asia and
other parts of the world. Over 80% of these
disputes were international.
Stockholm Chamber of
Commerce (SCC)
www.chamber.se
The Arbitration Institute of the SCC is a
prominent national arbitration institution
that has become increasingly significant in
international arbitration circles, particularly
for east-west commercial disputes.
The SCC administers arbitrations under its
own rules and also under the UNCITRAL
rules. The Arbitration Rules of the SCC
requires the tribunal to render an award
within six months of the date the matter is
referred to the tribunal (although this period
can be extended).
Unlike most of the other major arbitration
institutions whose standard rules can be
modified to accommodate requests for
expedited decisions, the SCC has designed
a separate set of rules specifically for
expedited arbitrations, which can be modified
by the parties. The use of the Expedited
Rules of the SCC is recommended to resolve
relatively minor disputes in a speedy and
cost-effective manner.
15
Swiss Chambers’ Arbitration
Institute (SCAI)
https://www.swissarbitration.org/
The SCAI is the primary international
arbitration institution in Switzerland. It brings
together the chambers of commerce of the
biggest cities in Switzerland, which have
been offering arbitration services since the
early twentieth century. It is one of the most
important arbitration centres in Europe,
particularly for intra-European disputes. Its
rules were last updated in 2012.
Where one of the parties is not domiciled in
Switzerland and does not have its habitual
residence there, the arbitration will be
subject to the Swiss Federal Statute on
Private International Law.
“Stephenson Harwood’s ‘overall level of
service is excellent.’”
.The Legal 500 UK 2017
16
United Nations Commission
on International Trade Law
(UNCITRAL)
www.uncitral.org
UNCITRAL, established in 1966, is the central
legal body at the United Nations devoted
to international trade law. In 1976, the
Commission promulgated a set of arbitration
rules to govern international arbitration
proceedings outside the framework of
an established administering body. The
UNCITRAL rules, last revised in 2010, are the
rules of choice for ad-hoc arbitrations.
Several arbitration institutions will serve
as an appointing authority for UNCITRAL
arbitrations, and will administer arbitrations
under the UNCITRAL rules. The AAA, LCIA,
SCC and HKIAC, among others, will serve
both functions. Resorting to the UNCITRAL
rules in an institutional arbitration may
be appropriate where the parties desire
an institutional arbitration in a particular
venue, but do not wish to use the rules of the
particular institution.
In addition to its Arbitration Rules, in 1996
UNCITRAL promulgated its “Notes on
Organising Arbitral Proceedings”. The Notes
provide a useful procedural checklist of
matters to consider when organising and
conducting an international arbitration,
whether ad hoc or institutional.
Before litigation starts
7. Specialist centres
In addition to the generalist arbitration centres, there are a number of important specialist
centres. In this section, we provide an overview of some of these.
Commodities
The majority of international trade in soft
commodities (rice, sugar, wheat, grain,
cocoa, coffee, animal feed and edible
oils) is carried out under standard form
contracts drafted by trade associations
which specialise in particular commodities.
A number of trade associations in London
provide standard form contracts and
arbitration facilities for the settlement
of disputes which arise out of sales
incorporating those contracts. Even if the
parties have not stipulated the relevant
association in their contract, they can later
agree to settle any dispute which might arise
via the facilities of these associations.
Most of the associations listed below have their
own arbitration rules, codes of conduct and
panels of qualified arbitrators. They are all based
in London and although arbitrations under the
associations’ rules can be held anywhere in the
world, most are heard in London.
Federation of Cocoa Commerce
Ltd (FCC)
www.cocoafederation.com
The Federation represents the interests of
cocoa growers in countries in South America,
Africa and Asia; of traders and brokers in
Europe; and of chocolate producers. It
handles arbitrations in relation to the quality
of goods and other disputes.
Federation of Oils, Seeds & Fats
Associations (FOSFA)
www.fosfa.org
The Federation, which represents over 1,000
members in 84 countries deals with edible
oils, including oil seeds such as soya beans
and oilseed rape. It overlaps with the Dutch
association, NOFTA, and has a similar set of
rules.
17
Grain & Feed Trade Association
(GAFTA)
www.gafta.com
GAFTA is an international organisation with
more than 1,400 members in 86 countries.
Members of the association are involved in
trading grain, animal feed, pulses and rice at
all stages of the supply chain from production
to final consumption. The members are made
up of trading companies and brokers. GAFTA
is recognised worldwide for its expertise in
contracts and arbitration relating to these
commodities. Contractual disputes are heard
by experienced, qualified arbitrators.
London Metal Exchange (LME)
www.lme.co.uk
The LME is the world’s leading futures market
for base metals. It provides an arbitration
service for the settlement of all types of
dispute relating to the trade of base metals.
London Rice Brokers’
Association (LRBA)
www.lrba.co.uk
This is an association of firms of rice
brokers in London, Paris and Antwerp which
provides a standard form contract requiring
arbitration under the LRBA Rules. The LRBA
maintains a panel of persons qualified to act
as arbitrators. Since August 1997, its rules
have been developed in accordance with the
GAFTA rules.
18
Sugar Trade Associations
(SAL & RSA)
www.sugarassociation.co.uk/sal
www.sugarassociation.co.uk/rsa
There are two sugar trade associations, run by
the same personnel from the same office. One
deals with raw sugar from origin and is called the
Sugar Association of London (SAL) The other
deals with refined sugar and is called the Refined
Sugar Association (RSA). They have identical
arbitration rules. Members of the associations,
together with other experienced sugar traders
nominated by members, act as arbitrators. They
use their trading experience and knowledge
of the rules to settle disputes referred to the
associations. Companies throughout the world
use the associations’ rules and arbitration
services.
Intellectual property
World Intellectual Property Organization
(WIPO)
www.wipo.int
The WIPO was established in 1967 as a
specialised agency of the United Nations. It was
established by the WIPO Convention as a means
of promoting the protection of intellectual
property worldwide. The WIPO Arbitration
and Mediation Centre was formed in 1994 to
offer arbitration and mediation services in the
resolution of international commercial disputes
between private parties. The procedures
offered by the Centre are specifically aimed
at disputes involving intellectual property.
An increasing number of disputes are being
filed with the Centre, including a mixture of
contractual disputes (such as patent and
software licences and trademark agreements)
and non-contractual disputes (such as patent
infringement).
The Centre holds a database of over 1,000 Maritime
arbitrators and experts with experience
and specialised knowledge of intellectual London Maritime Arbitrators’ Association
property disputes. After appointment, the (LMAA)
Centre monitors its cases to ensure that www.lmaa.org.uk
they are being progressed in a timely and
The LMAA was established in 1960 to bring
cost-effective manner. The parties can opt to
together those who were then frequently
use the WIPO Electronic Case Facility (WIPO
practising as maritime arbitrators. Over the
ECAF), which allows parties to store files
years, full membership of the LMAA has
and submissions on an electronic database,
expanded along with the list of practising
which can then be accessed anywhere in the
arbitrators connected with maritime arbitration.
world. This also facilitates case management
by providing case overview, time tracking and The LMAA now deals with disputes which
finance information. cover a wide range of disputes including
charterparties, bills of lading, ship
Notably, the Centre will help parties to
management, shipbuilding, commodities and
submit an existing dispute to WIPO, even
oil contracts. The LMAA is essentially a body
where the parties have not previously agreed
which brings together already-practising
to WIPO arbitration.
arbitrators. In addition to the natural
advantages that arise from bringing together
Investment arbitrators in one specialised discipline, the
International Centre for Settlement of LMAA has produced the ‘LMAA Terms’.
Investment Disputes (ICSID) These are the terms upon which members
www.worldbank.org/icsid of the LMAA accept appointments and the
rules by which LMAA arbitrations are run.
ICSID was established by the Convention For arbitrations commencing on or after 1
for Settlement of Investment Disputes January 2012, the LMAA Terms (2012) apply.
between states and nationals of other states The LMAA also has a Small Claims Procedure
(the Washington Convention) in 1965. The for lower value claims.
treaty was formulated by the World Bank and
ICSID is headquartered at the World Bank’s
principal offices in Washington, DC. ICSID is
designed to resolve investment-related legal
disputes between a contracting state and a
national of another contracting state. For more
information, please see Section 5 above.

19
20
8. Why Stephenson Harwood
LLP
Choosing the right form of arbitration is crucial and Stephenson
Harwood is uniquely placed to provide clients with the benefit of our
wide experience in the field.

Our arbitration team has a wealth of experience in resolving disputes

– both representing clients and sitting as arbitrators – in the world’s
leading arbitration institutions and in ad hoc international arbitrations.
We act for individuals, companies, governments and government
agencies. Our team has dealt with a number of important and high
profile arbitrations, in areas such as aviation, banking, commodities,
construction, energy, insurance, rail, shareholder agreements, joint
ventures, telecoms and defence equipment.

Stephenson Harwood’s international arbitration team is renowned for

its experience across a broad range of arbitration centres. We have
worked on many significant arbitrations under the rules of all of the major
arbitration institutions as well as ad hoc arbitrations in seats situated in
jurisdictions including California, China, Geneva, Germany, Hong Kong,
India, London, New York, Paris, Singapore and Thailand.

With one of the world’s foremost shipping and marine practices, we

are also a leading international name for maritime arbitration.

Our team’s expertise is truly global. Our experience includes disputes

involving parties from Africa, China, Eastern Europe, Europe, Hong
Kong, India, Latin America, the Middle East, Russia and Singapore.

Many of the arbitrations in which we have been involved are subject to

confidentiality provisions and therefore we cannot generally disclose
details of the disputes or client names.

For more information on our international arbitration experience,

please contact our head of international arbitration, Louis Flannery,
at louis.flannery@shlegal.com.

21
GET IN TOUCH

Rovine Chandrasekera Malcolm Kemp Timothy Cooke

Office managing partner, Dubai Partner, Hong Kong Partner, Singapore
T: +971 4 407 3901 T: +852 2533 2701 T: +65 6622 6231
E: rovine.chandrasekera@shlegal.com E: malcolm.kemp@shlegal.com E: timothy.cooke@shlegal.com

Louis Flannery Kamal Shah Shai Wade

Partner, London Partner, London Partner, London
T: +44 20 7809 2371 T: +44 20 7809 2301 T: +44 20 7809 2226
E: louis.flannery@shlegal.com E: kamal.shah@shlegal.com E: shai.wade@shlegal.com

Barthélemy Cousin
Partner, Paris
T: +33 1 44 15 80 04
E: barthelemy.cousin@shlegal.com

www.shlegal.com

© Stephenson Harwood LLP 2017. Any reference to Stephenson Harwood in this document means Stephenson
Harwood LLP and/or its affiliated undertakings. Any reference to a partner is used to refer to a member of
Stephenson Harwood LLP.
The fibre used to produce this paper is sourced from sustainable plantation wood and is elemental chlorine free.
BD097-International arbitration-1118